Parallel Fx Chains


(Quincy) #1

Just a quick one, but it’d be nice to be able to have parallel FX for a bit more flexibility.

One quick example would be multiple different filters all controlled with hydra device, or parallel compression without needing send tracks. I’m personally not too bothered about complex modular routing (buzz-alike) that many people have suggested, but more simple parallel FX chains would be great.

Cheers!


(kazakore) #2

Isn’t it simple enough with Sends?


(Fullofkittens) #3

Using fx racks is much, much simpler than using sends.


(rhowaldt) #4

for those of us with no experience in Live or whatever, could you possibly describe your request in a bit more detail and clarity?


(Fullofkittens) #5

I described it as well as I could in this youtube vid:


(gentleclockdivider) #6

we can achieve exactly the same thing with sends …parallel or serial …I love SENDS .


(Fullofkittens) #7

It’s possible to do it, but what a pain in the ass to manage multiple tracks like that.


(rhowaldt) #8

@fullofkittens: thanks, that was very clear. i understand why this is simpler than using sends, and would not mind something like a ‘chain’ button on DSP effects to differentiate between serial and parallel processing. however, it is indeed true that the possibility to do this already exists in Renoise, through using sends.


(rhowaldt) #9

you might be interested in this one as well, for those that have not seen it yet: https://forum.renoise.com/t/machine-view-like-buzz-tracker/32210


(Quincy) #10

I can appreciate that sends are a very flexible tool and I love them too, but it’s a long way round to do certain common tasks and to generally just be able to mix between a dry and wet (effected) signal which is very useful. Parallel compression, A/B comparison of EQ/filtering/compression etc would all be very easy with parallel FX ability.

With due respect to the devs (I am a programmer myself) I suspect that this is a relatively straightforward task in terms of coding the signal flow, but of course the GUI/UX considerations are considerable.


(rhowaldt) #11

yeah, usually when i make a suggestion i to and dream up a possible GUI-implementation for it as well, and if possible even make a mockup of that. with this idea, i had the most trouble figuring out how to fit it into the GUI, so that might be why the enthusiasm was a bit meek from my side. maybe try and come up with a great GUI-idea (and preferably a mockup as well), to try and elevate the level of support?


(Quincy) #12

I’m no GUI designer, it’d look like a childs scrawl!

In a nutshell I think that the way ableton does it works very well. You can essentially nest a set of FX in serial inside a wrapper. No modular madness, just a set of devices in serial that are wrapped in a parent device. This way you can nest wrappers within wrappers, so the flexibility is great but the signal and GUI flow is still quite simple.

If you think about a select box (much like the list of FX in renoise) as a way to select the current chain to display, then the GUI remains simple. You can only ever see a single chain within any wrapper at one time, so the the single horizontal list of FX paradigm remains. So you could easily split a single in two, run it through two chains of FX, and then merge it back into a single single for further processing afterwards.

Ableton also throws in the concept of “macro controls” which are basically like a hydra device, they allow control of multiple parameters with a single control. These two concepts combined (nestable chains and hydra control) makes for a very flexible and powerful way to use FX.


#13

For the people saying that “send” is the same thing, try managing 10 parallel chains with tons of plugins, by 2 clicks, now there renoise is overwhelming. FX nesting (like in ableton) made me more creative, and when i try to do that in renoise, it’s a bit slower (well, pain in the ass when managing lots of parallel chains).

  • For example i’d make only 1 drum hit in sampler (drum rack/ableton) and i make like 5 parallel chains to it ( needed or not, that’s not the point), now add few more drum hits, and try to make exact to them, separate parallel chains for individual hits. Now this gets a bit anoyying, as i’m used to simplicity from the ableton audio fx rack.
    This is the only thing i’d like to see in Renoise. Everything else is just plain perfect. I lack some parallel craziness like i used to make.

Quincy: this is my only wish for Renoise itself, and you made a good post And i support it fully!
(And for the forum members - sorry i’m spamming forum with this request a lot lately, as it is the only thing that haunts me - Renoise is perfect already in other aspects, this could be the ultimate feature for me, and others who like to get creative with parallel chains (not the chains with 1-2 effects, but rather with tons of)):flushed::flushed::flushed:


(Zer0 Fly) #14

Yep I would also like the doofer to work like instrument fx with multi input and output routing. Parallel processing ftw!

I also imagine the preset business becoming a great thing. native neuro distortions, vocoders etc. all becoming available within single preset clicks


#15

@OopsIFly
I totally agree! Opens up all sorts of audio processing much easier, and available for complexity.

within one single “audio FX rack”, you could be making anything literally. within the “one nested chain” :star_struck::star_struck::star_struck::star_struck::star_struck::star_struck: